Planning Commission Experts Committee Report on Causes, Consequences and Nature of Maoist Insurgencies
Sukla Sen
Set up by the Planning Commission, in May 2006, the Expert Group on “Development Issues to Deal with the Causes of Discontent, Unrest and Extremism” submitted its Report in April 2008,
It had 16 members, finally: D. Bandyopadhyay, S.R. Sankaran, Dr B.D. Sharma, Kamala Prasad, Prakash Singh, Ajit Doval, Sukhdeo Thorat, K. Balagopal, Ms Bela Bhatia, Dr E. A. S. Sarma, K.B. Saxena, Saibal Gupta, Dilip Singh Bhuria, Ram Dayal Munda, Dr N. J. Kurian and Santosh Mehrotra.
Two members, viz. Amit Bhaduri and Amiya Samanta, did not participate in any of the meetings and thereby they ceased to be the members of this Group. Dr. Vinayan had been a very active member, but passed away before the Group could conclude its deliberations.
Consequently, three others, viz. Dr. E.A.S. Sarma, N.J. Kurian and Shri K.B. Saxena were
inducted.
During the process, Prakash Singh and Ajit Doval supported the Salwa Judum movement; the remaining fourteen members unequivocally opposed the project.
Bela Bhatia and K. Balagopal penned the first draft. Both are well-known human rights activists. (K Balagopal has since passed away.)
This remains a valuable document in the current context.
Sukla
| NAXALITE VIOLENCE - ARTICLES | |
| #2599, 18 June 2008 | |
|
NAXAL MOVEMENT: A REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S EXPERT COMMITTEE REPORT Rajat Kumar Kujur Lecturer, GM College, Orissa e-mail: rajat...@gmail.com In May 2006, the Planning Commission appointed an expert committee headed by D Bandopadhyay, a retired IAS officer instrumental in dealing with the Naxalites in West Bengal in the 1970s along with Prakash Singh, former DGP of Uttar Pradesh and an expert on Naxal issues, Ajit Doval, former director of Intelligence Bureau, BD Sharma, a retired bureaucrat and activist, Sukhdeo Thorat, UGC chairman and K Balagopal, a human rights lawyer as its members to study development issues and address the causes of 'Discontent, Unrest and Extremism.' The committee submitted its report in early June and which is now available on the Planning Commission's website. The expert committee has done a commendable job in underscoring the social, political, economic and cultural discrimination faced by the SCs/STs across the country as a key factor in drawing large number of discontented people towards the Naxalites. The group compared 20 severely Naxalite-affected districts in five states -- Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Orissa -- with 20 non-affected districts in the same states to establish a correlation between certain human development indicators and their link to social unrest. On the basis of this, it establishes lack of empowerment of local communities as the main reason for the spread of the Naxal movement. Choosing its words carefully, the report states that "We have two worlds of education, two worlds of health, two worlds of transport and two worlds of housing...'' The expert committee has delved deep into the new conflict zones of India, i.e. the mines and mineral rich areas, steel zones as well as the SEZs. The report holds the faulty system of land acquisition and a non-existent R&R Policy largely responsible for the support enjoyed by the Naxalites. "Even those who know very little about the Naxalite movement know that its central slogan has been 'land to the tiller' and that attempts to put the poor in possession of land have defined much of their activityâ?¦the notion of a SEZ, irrespective of whether it is established on multi-cropped land or not, is an assault on livelihood.'' On the other hand, the committee makes a forceful plea for a policy and legal framework to enable small and marginal farmers to lease-in land with secure rights while landless poor occupying government land should not be treated as encroachers. For the first time in the history of the Naxal movement, a government appointed committee has put the blame on the state for the growth of the movement. Providing statistics of 125 districts from the Naxal-affected states, the committee finds out that the state bureaucracy has pitiably failed in delivering good governance in these areas. The committee has also severely criticized the states for their double standard in making Panchayats truly the units of local self governance. Findings of the report recommend rigorous training for the police force not only on humane tactics of controlling rural violence but also on the constitutional obligation of the state for the protection of fundamental rights. Coming down heavily on the civil war instrument of Salwa Judum, the committee has asked for its immediate suspension. Making a departure from the usual government position, the expert committee concludes that development paradigm pursued since independence has aggravated the prevailing discontent among the marginalized sections of society. Citing democratic principles, the report also argues for the right to protest and discovers that unrest is often the only thing that actually puts pressure on the government to make things work and for the government to live up to its own promises. The report can be termed as an honest attempt to look in to the problem of Naxalism from a wider perspective. The government now can have a road map to approach Naxalism termed as the single largest security challenge facing the country. While many find the report 'refreshing' for making a forceful plea to depart from a security-centric view of tackling Naxal violence, there is a danger of misinterpreting security measures in the context of the Naxal movement. Many believe in a law and order approach to tackle Naxalism while others consider Naxalism as the reflection of the prevalent injustice in the society. Naxalism is a security challenge and only an inclusive growth formula will minimize the legitimate dissent of the people. Naxalism is a case where we can not separate policing and development. A human police force with a proper agenda for development can ensure the success of any anti-Naxal policy. Dealing with Naxalism needs a holistic approach with development initiatives as an integral part of the security approach. Security here must be understood in its broader perspective which includes human development in its scope, because human security is an inseparable component of any human development formula, and vice versa. | |
Poverty breeding left-wing extremism in India
03 June 2008
India's Planning Commission has cautioned against treating left-wing extremism in the country as a mere law and order problem while drawing attention to its socio-economic dimensions. Poverty, lack of access to forest resources and other deprivations are cited as reasons for growth of naxalism in a recent report.
Land alienation, poverty amongst scheduled tribes and dalits and lack of access to basic forest resources have contributed to the growth of naxalism, says the Planning Commission.
Its report, Development challenges in extremist affected areas, indicts Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh. The report also critiques SEZs and the complete failure of instruments like the Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
In 2006, the Planning Commission set up an expert group headed by D. Bandopadhyay, a retired IAS officer experienced in dealing with naxalites in West Bengal in the 1970s, to look into the phenomenon of naxalism.
-
- An armed naxal cadre / Photo credit: Down to Earth
Its terms of reference included “identification of processes and causes contributing to continued tensions and alienation in the areas of unrest and discontent, such as widespread displacement, forest issues, unsecured tenancies and other forms of exploitation like usury, land alienation, etc.”
It also included “special measures to be taken for strengthening the implementation of PESA.” The committee comprised Prakash Singh, former Uttar Pradesh DGP; Ajit Doval, former director of the Intelligence Bureau; B.D. Sharma, retired bureaucrat and activist; Sukhdeo Thorat, UGC chairperson and K. Balagopal, human rights lawyer.
First of its kind
“This report is a first of its kind in the last 22 years by the Centre. We have tried an open approach rather than a security-centric one,” informs a senior member of the expert group.
Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal – states reeling under rural poverty, with a major proportion of Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) – are precisely the spaces that form the hotbed of the naxal movement.
The report stresses the need “to come out with a consensus report which could give the authorities, the civil society and public at large an analysis of the situation and a package of programmes to tackle the issue of rural violence which has been continuing in the rural areas of India for nearly four decades.”
The report argues land-related factors play an important role in the growth of naxalism, as seen in the ‘land to the tiller’ policy of the naxalites. It does say, however, that naxalites have done little to redistribute private land among the poor.
Pointing out that thousands of acres of land remain fallow, the expert group has asked the government to devise legal means to ensure that the landless get land.
In this context, they recommend laws like PESA; the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005; and The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 be implemented in full earnest in order to ensure people their land and rights.
The group has also called for a strict monitoring and coordination of various commissions formed as custodian to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes; it urges consultation among these bodies and joint initiatives for concerted and compulsory action, mandatory for chief ministers to follow.
To ensure financial stability, the expert group recommends all debt liabilities of the weaker sections be liquidated “where the debtor has paid an amount equivalent to the original principal and where intended benefit for which the loan was taken has not accrued to the borrowers.”
The report states “Public purpose” in the Land Acquisition Act should be limited to national security and public welfare and should not be stretched to acquisition for companies, cooperatives and registered societies.
The report targets amendments contained in the Land Acquisition (Amendment Bill) 2007: “These proposals need to be further revised to minimise displacement and secure the rights of affected displaced persons.”
Corroborating the report, Nihar Nayak, research fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, says: “An essential measure long overdue is a time bound possession survey of all land under cultivation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This should lead to distribution of grant of title to those who do not have title, identification of land illegally alienated and restoration of alienated land so identified.”
Moreover, the expert group has recommended, the power granted by PESA to gram sabhas to prevent alienation of land should be extended suitably to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, beyond the scheduled areas, as recommended by various commissions and as is prevalent in parts in some states (Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh)
First reaction
Critics feel the report is loosely titled; it does not define who is an ‘extremist’, or what classifies as ‘extremism’.
“Even though it has focused only on leftwing extremism (Maoism or naxalism) and development challenges, it has overlooked other conflict-affected regions with a similar problem, like the Northeast and Jammu and Kashmir,” says Animesh Roul, executive director, Society for Study of Peace and Conflict.
Ajai Sahni, executive director, Institute for Conflict Management, Delhi, is harsher: “It is a cut and paste job of solutions proposed earlier. It does not look at the ground situation.”
But Bandopadhyay has a kinder take: “Naxalism has emerged as a result of deficit in planning; constant alienation has made people take up arms and it’s time one understands the problem as not just a law and order problem but one that’s foundations are socio economic.”
The report relates naxalism to deeper faults in governance, land alienation, unemployment and inequalities in societies. But for Roul, this isn’t enough: “It remains silent over the growing criminalisation of this ‘so-called ideological movement’ and the rampant exploitation of natural resources and extortion business by naxalite groups.”
He adds: “It also overlooks the problem of exploitation of women and children, mostly tribals and poor villagers in surroundings.”
Expert group members feel talks with the naxals, “by building trust with them”, is the way out. “One must open up to the idea of talking to the groups.
With the government ready to have dialogue with the United Liberation Front of Assam and Kashmir militants, it’s crucial to engage in talks with naxals rather than further marginalise them and have a police-centric approach,” adds Bandopadhyay.
Quite contrary
A May 2006 status paper the Ministry of Home Affairs prepared had very clearly stated that no talks should be held with naxals unless they lay down arms. The Planning Commission recommends a more subtle approach.
It says the tribal sub-plan be brought under the Fifth Schedule, that forest produce be provided protection in the form of minimum support prices and all petty cases registered under forest legislation against tribals and poor people be withdrawn.
“It is imperative that the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 be implemented properly, so that those affected by extremism are not only rehabilitated with land but are also ensured a livelihood,” says Ramesh Sharma, activist, Ekta Parishad.
Salwa Judum slammed
Says the report: “As a principle of good governance such a situation (as Salwa Judum) is not desirable.” Even Chhattisgarh Congress leader Mahendra Karma, instigator of the movement, has now acknowledged Salwa Judum has gone out of his control.
However, Chhattisgarh home minister Ramvichar Netam and Director General of Police Vishwa Ranjan think differently. “They have come to these camps on their own and they know that they are safe here. Let there be a fair enquiry and the truth will be known to all,” says Netam. He vouches facilities provided at the camps for women and children.
However, says Shubrangshu Chowdhury, a freelance journalist and an activist working in Chhattisgarh: “Those in camps live in the most unhygienic conditions and away from their natural habitat.”
Adds Shiv Narayan, Ekta Parishad activist based in Kanker district in Chhattisgarh, “Salwa Judum has done more harm than good. The villagers are now beginning to return to their villages in the forest, they face a threat from naxalites now. They would not think twice before harming the villagers since they believe that the villagers had deposed against them.”
The report recommends Salwa Judum be scrapped, since “it delegitimises politics, dehumanises people and degenerates those engaged in their security and above all represents abdication of the state itself.”
It clarifies that forced migration of tribals to camps or to other states leaves their land up for grabs for industry. It suggests deploying an empowered task force to execute the protection and development programmes for the benefit of the people and redressal of their grievances.
The report suggests that the authorities should encourage civil society groups, having knowledge of, and sympathy with, local tribals in assisting this task force for wider participation of people in implementation of the various laws.
Who reads?
The Planning Commission is hopeful the government will take a step towards talks this election year. However, believes Nayak, negotiations need to be area-specific.
“The causes for uprising are different in each state and recommendations have to be made accordingly. In Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and Tamil Nadu, land alienation and caste discrimination form the basis for discontent. States like Orissa have had to suffer from large-scale tribal displacement and forest degradation due to large-scale industrialisation projects; Maharashtra’s farmer suicides have led to uprisings.”
The expert group also feels there is a need to bring the naxals into the mainstream by giving them a stake in the mineral-rich area they occupy. “This will give them some sort of security of their land. But we need to ensure that they do not turn out to be as corrupt as the present contractors,” said a senior member of the Planning Commission.